The idea of introducing compulsory religious instruction in Berlin schools, with the same status as courses on ethics (introduced in 2006), was strongly rejected in a referendum held last April 26th. What is your opinion on this subject?
First of all I do not understand what ‘religious instruction’ means. As an historian of religions, the definition ‘religious instruction’ seems ambiguous to me. I do not understand whether this is a course on the various religions or a course teaching religion within the framework of education. Secondly, I do not see any relation to ethics. Do we really want universal ethics? Do we really wish to propose a bewildering range of the multiple perspectives of the world? I do not understand this mixture of historical and anthropological teaching of the religious phenomenon and the teaching of ethics which is something quite different.
Secular and religious ethics; the debate remains open. Should one perhaps integrate the two aspects within the same state curriculum?
I believe that teaching the history of various religions is desirable, but not just at any level. My personal opinion is that there is no need to provide seven and eight-year-old students with this kind of education. One must first teach them to coexist with differences. This is what matters most. I do however agree that there is a need to introduce classes on civic education allowing the classroom to become a place where thoughts are freely expressed and where differences can be debated. In this sense history of religions could prove to be a precious ally; but not religions as such. I believe that it is not a good idea to introduce into schools a plural catechism. One must instead observe such matters from a distance, in a detached way as Levi Strauss said. The positive aspect would be to also introduce such an approach in state schools, because it could educate students on tolerance and understanding the differences in others. I believe that a plurality of catechisms in schools is a dangerous idea.
Could the legacy of religions integrate state education from a historical or moral perspective?
What is interesting is humankind’s legacy when reflecting on the effects of religion. This is historical reflection. One can reflect on the Crusades, religious persecution and the great mystical schools of thought. However, I do not think that religions should bring their morals into schools. Schools should have pluralistic and not religious morals.
Let us address the situation in Switzerland. This country is a model as far as religious instruction is concerned because it boasts a great wealth and variety of examples.
This is true, Switzerland is a world unto itself. It is a microcosm of all of Europe’s diversities. There are Cantons in which there is no separation between church and state and others where they are totally separate. The situation is extremely varied regarding religious instruction or the religious phenomenon. In Geneva, for example, there has been almost total secularism until now, but the possibility of introducing or not introducing religious instruction in schools is now being discussed. This kind of instruction does, however, already exist in various forms in the neighbouring cantons of Neuchâtel, Vaux and Valais.
‘Positive secularism’ is often debated in France with reference to republican and constitutional values. However, religious communities refer to the principle of secularism as a form of state ideology that abolishes the specificity of religious heritage. Is it possible to understand history, art or philosophy without an adequate knowledge of religion?
No, I do not think one can understand history without knowledge of religions. However, knowledge of religions does not mean practising them. On the other hand, one cannot practice various religions all together. This is the observer’s knowledge; anthropological and scientific. An anthropological perspective is that of an astronomer observing things from a distance, with no animosity and with a degree of empathy. I do not believe it is necessary to analyse the various religious traditions in depth so as to understand them. Placing oneself outside of religious traditions is a great step towards tolerance. This is of course a delicate and complex process.
Things are more complicated in Europe. After the hornets’ nest stirred up by intellectuals and the defenders of laicity, which addressed the idea of introducing references to Europe’s Christian roots in the European Constitutional Treaty, there is a real need for a debate as well as for clearer directives.
In this European debate, schools should not be considered as places for spreading religions, but rather as platforms for spreading knowledge, including knowledge of religions. Religions must not however become taboo subjects that cannot be debated in schools. One should be able to discuss everything in schools. Schools must be considered places of freedom and reflection. The religion is a subject that schools should analyse and understand, but it should never be part of the curriculum.
The emergence of issues linked to religious communities, for example the issues concerning the training of Imams, can result in conflict between communities and the state. Do these authorities, and state education in general, leave parts of society without reference points and totally without information?
This is a problem that exists but it cannot be solved at the level of schools but rather by universities. There is a desire for university level training. This issue also concerns Catholic and Protestant theologians. I think it is an excellent thing for a priest to know Greek or Hebrew. There is education that universities can provide. As far as the training of Imams is concerned, were I a Muslim, I would prefer a well-educated Imam also trained in a state institution and not only in a private one. I would also like him to have critical and historical instruments.
The training of religious cadres could be accompanied by training on the principles of secularity, the constitution, republican values as well as scientific and historical methodologies…
I believe that it is of the utmost importance for those called upon to communicate with many people and provide religious instruction to receive an education that includes a minimum of our social and intellectual customs. One must, however, bear in mind that some people are atheists or simply indifferent to religion. Teaching must take all this into account. No one is privileged in the field of religious instruction, but no one should be ignored.
Translation by Francesca Simmons